View Single Post
Old 10-16-2012, 08:37 AM   #26
steinmann
Member
 
Location: Vienna

Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 64
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elcannibal View Post
Second, Life is a huge company, sequencing is only a certain part of it.
Yes! And a fairly small part as of now. But the sequencing market is large enough to become a major part of it.

Quote:
Third, Life's CEO is one of the worst person to execute plan and one of the best to oversell something.
Why would you think so?

Quote:
Let's look at this race again, the race for market share (because there is a finite number of room for new sequencers, believe me). Where does this race take you... The manufacturing of instruments that do more, faster at a lower cost than the market can accept. A zero dollar machine at zero dollar cost that runs a genome in 0 seconds, sadly, will still not fit in a proper hospital pathology workflow (and please stop telling me Anderson or Mayo does it, that's not the global market).

Now take a look at the R&D spending for these new machines, take a look at the acquisition cost of Ion Torrent, the huge debt of solid. Now look at what their plan is: Make more machines at a lower cost using lower costs reagents for bigger results... That's a direct line to lower revenues... not your best business model.
That whole part makes little sense to me. You talk like building cheaper and better devices than your competitor would be a recipe for economic failure.
steinmann is offline   Reply With Quote